Uploaded by Mark Zuckerberg đˇ
3106x4096 JPG 1.21 MB
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
How daaaaaaaaare you!
Tags
+-SH safe2236500 +-SH edit178731 +-SH screencap300894 +-SH cozy glow10010 +-SH human261622 +-SH pegasus523507 +-SH pony1666785 +-SH frenemies (episode)1782 +-SH g42098842 +-SH angry37875 +-SH comparison5390 +-SH cozy glow is best facemaker602 +-SH female1874348 +-SH filly102866 +-SH greta thunberg10 +-SH gums85 +-SH high res411353 +-SH irl85577 +-SH irl human29935 +-SH op is a duck4930 +-SH op is trying to start shit3128 +-SH op is trying to start shit so badly that it's kinda funny257 +-SH photo99488 +-SH politics1895
Source
not provided yet
Loading...
Loading...
Â
Hey, I just came by to say that youâre completely delusional and brainwashed, especially when youâre trying to moral virtue on a fukken pony picture site. Way to ruin a nice wank, buddy >:-(
Yes. Most of the reactors (at least in my country) were built in the 60âs and 70âs. Nuclear engineers have had decades to study Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and learn from them, and computers are several orders of magnitude more powerful and sophisticated than they were back then. People who live near nuclear reactors actually perceive them to be much safer than people who live further away.
Â
However, fearmongering has made it virtually impossible to actually build nuclear reactors in many countries, even if there are generous government subsidies involved, because people will try to block new reactor projects at every turn. The only place that actually wants to build new reactors is the Navy.
Â
Â
@Background Pony #A42A Â
And Cozy isnât astroturf, either.
Edited
Â
Indeed. Despite all the fearmongering around nuclear energy, the problems associated in terms of health are far lesser than the number associated with carbon related things, like for instance coal, which causes deaths and other health problems all the time.
Â
You can also notice that with major nuclear disasters, they tend to have outdated designs involved (Chernobyl [sheer incompetence was involved on that one], Fukushima [which had safety concerns outright ignored ], Three Mile Island), which there are definitely safer reactor designs that have come since, and the technology will continue to evolve.
Edited
âActual climatologists and other scientists who understand what is going on have been warning us for decades, and consistently been right in those warningsâ
Â
Yeah thatâs a laugh line right there at the end. I actually do believe in human-induced climate change and no, those warnings-at least the worst case ones actually worth worrying about-have not been remotely right. No increase in drought, no increase in hurricanes at least in the Atlantic, and cost of weather disasters when normalized to how much wealth exists is not increasing. The âpolar bears dying outâ story was an outright scam. The CEI isnât a good institute but that doesnât make them wrong here.
Â
Thing is, even if the Worst Case Scenarios came to pass, there is simply no case for taking drastic action to cut down CO2 emissions. The numbers do not add up for that. Not even close the misery Germany and the like are putting themselves through is already worse than global warming. In addition, if we had to de-carbonize itâs nuclear that would save us not garbage like wind or solar.
the funny thing is apart from the person whoâs in it there is nothing political about this picture
Cool shitpost.
Â
@Brass Melody Â
Maybe if she had, sheâdâve been less of a villainous psychopath in the making.
Edited
Only one Thing to say: Get well.
I don´t make sense but I am usually Right. XD
Logical fallacy as the only way to make a significant change to the way we do things is from the government level or someone with significant wealth and influence.
Â
You never made sense at all throughout this whole saga especially considering the fact that you already agree with her. I think that you lost an argument when you devolved to as @Background Pony #E2F5 has said, nitpicking and blatantly stupid logical fallacies.
Â
If planting a tree in a localized area that doesnât even cover more than .001% of the earthâs surface wouldâve helped significantly then youâd see climate activists doing it all the time.
Â
Instead, thatâs why legislation and government is used instead because they have the resources, power and the influence to make it happen. This is common fucking sense and Iâm genuinely confused why you seriously think this is a good argument.
Â
Every time I read your posts, I literally lose brain cells. This is serious. Jesus christ.
So how many trees have you planted? Or is all you do discuss and destroy?
At the rate weâre acidifiyng the oceans with CO2, not for long. Also, youâre aware that most of oxygen produced by sea organisms stays (surprise!) dissolved in water, while production of land organisms goes straight to the pool we use? Who could have guessed, eh?
Â
I like how deniers always nitpick one, tiny part of the argument that changes nothing even if the nitpick was true (but 99% of the time, itâs not) and act like that was serious contribution to discussionâŚ
You know there is way more plant live in the Oceans, Darling Â
your current filter.Â
No she doesnât, because her speeches outright state that economic growth and environmental sustainability are mutually exclusiveâŚwhich as the video I linked earlier proves is most definitely not the case.
Dude. You sound really childish right now, the point is that sheâs fighting for the same things that you and me want and you seem to be attacking her because sheâs a child.
Â
No, the Trees and the plant life on this planet are the âLungsâ of this world because without them, we canât breathe. Thatâs associated with the Amazon Rainforest of which the current Brazilian regime is planning to strip and cut down for corporate interests.
Â
Really, this is just petty garbage. She clearly supports climate change and is going around spreading the word of it, sheâs doing what most teenagers fail to do and is fighting for something she believes in.
Â
Iâm pretty sure that sheâs supportive of whatever solution addresses climate change, youâre just being an unnecessary dick right now.
Â
Youâre angry at her over nothing. She agrees with what youâre saying and youâre still attacking her. This is stupid. Iâm done.
How so you come from âI believe in Climate Changeâ to âI believe everything the Donald Trump of Climate Change says.â?
Â
Sorry I rather hear from experts than from a puppet what is wrong and how we should Approach it. Keep your Cult of personality shit away. She is just the newest âchild activistâ we got. Not the first not the last.
Â
All she does is talk no Action. Cry me a river. Put your Money behind some actual Projects. The Oceans are the lungs of the world so Maybe something like this: Â
https://www.breakingasia.com/news/this-solar-powered-barge-cleans-50-tons-of-ocean-trash-a-day/
So you agree with absolutely everything she says but you just donât like her? Then you arenât uneducated, that just means that you got problems my guy. Serious ones.
Â
âI agree with everything you said, but I just donât like you,â I cannot believe it. This is unbelievable. So childish and petty.
Yeah, we literally have not. These chains of abrupt and devastating climate crises around the world should take place thousands or even millions of years apart. It shouldnât take mere decades talk less of centuries. Thatâs just how the global weather should work naturally, not so abrupt. Not every other year, some areaâs having a climate crises.
Â
Dude, do you realize how fast fire is in a hot, dry, area like Australia? Do ya? Who are you to suggest that they didnât use enough firefighting resources? WHo couldâve predicted when a fire would start with spontaneous they can be in a region like Australia?
Â
The hell is wrong with you? Sheâs clearly very passionate about her goals and isnât one of those kids who do this for the clout and whatnot. She does this because she genuinely wants the planet to get better away from the crimes of the fossil fuel companies. We have numerous energy sources that can solve this problem, why are we not using them?
Â
What? A booming economy and first-access to healthcare should we elect a governor who chooses so? Keep in mind that States run by Republican majorities are some of the lowest in terms of education and contribution to the USâs prosperity. Theyâre among the highest in poverty, cancer and illiteracy.
Â
https://www.survivornet.com/articles/do-you-live-in-a-cancer-hot-zone-these-are-the-20-states-with-the-highest-cancer-rates/
Â
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/23/the-10-most-and-least-educated-states-in-2018.html
Â
But yeah, keep crapping on States that contribute to the union more than the others, buddy.
You assume the age and education of a shitposter that made his/her account 7 days ago. Also you don´t Need to be a Climate denier to don´t like the Person, so that is assumption number 3 if you are not Talking About some comments here.
Â
When a fandom is this big, that 1% of the bad part suddenly becomes a pretty big number.